Back
2000 Supreme(SC) 886
2000(6) Supreme 471
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
V.N. Khare & S.N. Phukan, JJ.
State of Orissa & Ors. -Appellants
versus
Harihar Satpathy & Ors. -Respondents
Civil Appeal No. 3659 of 1998
Decided on 27-4-2000
Headnote:Service Law-Pension-Work charged employees in State Irrigation Department-Petition before State Administrative Tribunal (SAT) claiming pension on ground that they should have been regularised in view of a resolution which were in force-Petition uncontested-SAT directing grant of pension-Appeal thereagainst-Respondents very petty employees not represented before Supreme Court-SAT s order not interfered with in view of peculiar circumstances leaving question of law to be decided in appropriate case.
Key Points: - Respondents appointed as chowkidar and mechanic in work-charged establishments of Orissa Irrigation Department retired and filed for pension absorption based on a 1965 resolution (!) . - Appellants did not contest the respondents’ application nor file any counter affidavit before the State Administrative Tribunal (!) (!) . - Tribunal accepted respondents' case and directed grant of pension; appellants appealed to Supreme Court (!) (!) . - Supreme Court observed respondents were very petty employees not represented before them, and the question of law was left open for decision in an appropriate case (!) . - With reference to special facts and circumstances, the appeal was dismissed without interfering with the Tribunal’s order (!) (!) . - Judgment outcome: Appeal dismissed, no costs awarded (!) .
What is the nature of the employment dispute regarding pension rights for work-charged employees in the State Irrigation Department?
What are the grounds on which the State Administrative Tribunal directed the grant of pension to the respondents?
Why did the Supreme Court dismiss the appeal filed by the State of Orissa against the Tribunal's order?
ORDER
Respondent No. 1 herein, was appointed as Chowkidar in the Work Charged Establishment of Government of Orissa on 1.7.1961. Respondent No. 2 was also appointed in the same capacity on 22.12.1965. Respondent No. 3 joined as Mechanic in the Work Charged Establishment in the Irrigation Department of Government of Orissa on 6.11.1961. Subsequently, they retired on different dates viz., Respondent No. 1 in the year 1978, Respondent No. 2 in the year 1985 and Respondent No. 3 in the year 1986. Subsequently, the aforesaid Respondents filed an Original Application before the Orissa State Administrate Tribunal with a prayer that they ought to have been absorbed in the regular service in view of the resolution dated 22.1.1965 and if they are notionally absorbed they will be entitled to pension. It appears that the Appellants neither contested the said application nor filed any counter affidavit. With the result, the Tribunal accepted the case of the Respondents and directed the Appellants to give pension. It is against the said judgment the Appellants are in appeal before us.
2. Learned Counsel for the Appellants urged that the posts occupied by the Respondents were not brought over to the regular establishment as they were not of permanent nature and, therefore, they could not be granted pension. In the present case, the Appellants did not choose to file any counter affidavit before the Tribunal. The Respondents being very petty employees are not represented before us. Therefore, we are not inclined to interfere with the matter leaving the question of law open to be decided in an appropriate case. In view of the special facts and circumstances of the case, we dismiss the appeal. No costs.
(C.R.) Appeals dismissed.
*****************
